Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1887-12-02

NJ. Editor In your issue Of Nov. 2jth
! lind an article entitled, Some data from
another sougce, relating to the Whiting
ham controversy This correspondent is a
gentleman Of culture and high legal attain
ments, whose opinion in matters Of local
history are worthy Of the most careful con.
sideration. ] welcome him to this contro-
versy. knowing that / shall be fairly treat
ed, even If We do not agree. The question
under discussion appears 10 have arisen
from remark ! made III 1880, which was
ms follows
There mas been some confusion among histori-
ans lu relation 10 a tract ~ land called Cumh,.r
land township. and It has generally been claimed
that the territory was identical with the town of
Nottingham, hut such Is not the case
The correspondent with whom am now
dealing has never fallen in pieces on nc
count Of the above statement, but thinks
am mistaken and in legitimate way un-
dertakes 10 vindIcate his belief In the
first place we know where Whitingham
was on the 18th Of March, 100, and TINT
it remains there 10 this day Does any one
know where Cumberland was in i77Oi
Your correspondent says that a map of
ermout was published in 1913. upon which
the identical territory of the present town
Of Nottingham is laid down as township
by the name Of Cumberland He also saws
that said Cumberland was bounded north
by Draper, east by Halifax, south bv Mass
achusetts Bay, and west by marlborough
l happen 10 own this same map and the
town of Rendsborough Is not OH it.
Readsborough was Incorporated the same
year W mtingham was, consequently both
were vacant land before that, and there Is
no record IN the wide world 10 show where
the line OF Cumberland township was. The
map spoken OF by your correspondent was
published in l719 by the authority of the
same state that had chartered Whitingham
nine years before, but when the survey was
made is another question.
There Is another important matter 10 be
considered. Was W hitingham recognized
by Vermont before the publication Of this
map II it was, Nottingham was not
Cumberland in 10 Nottingham had a
representative ia the legislature of Yer
mont in liis and also in l179 If the town
was recognized TO that extent as Whiting
ham, how could the publication of a map
make it Cumberland If it was not Cum
bertrand when the map says it was, (and it
clearly appears that it was not how evil
dent 1t must be 70 every candid mind that
the map should not be treated as a factor
IN tins controversy No such town as
Cumberland wa, ever defined by metes and
bounds in Cumberland county. In tracing
the boundary between the counties of Ben
nlngton and Cumberland, your correspond
ent follows the line TO the northeastern
corner Of Stratton thence southerlv on
the westerly line Of Somerset 10 the south
west corner thereof, etc. Not being civil
engineer ! fail to comprehend how the
southwest corner of Somerset could be
reached by any such process. If YOUR
correspondent has a deed of his house lot.
defining its location and boundaries, and
some person should assume 70 own lot
just like 1t in the same place, think he
would be called upon TO show his title. The
case IN hand is parallel Show your proofs.
We have our plan and charter Of Whiting
ham. Give us something besides theory
about Cumberland. CLARK JHLsoN.
Worcester, Mass, Nov. 2S. 1887.